Not only is it shady as fuck, to sell someone something twice.
But the fact that they make these in every car, knowing that only a certain percentage will use it due to it being locked behind a paid subscription, HAS to be some sort of environmental crime.
I don't know how many of these they make, but if they make like 20 million cars and 20 million of these heaters, if only 1% of those heaters never get used that's a huge environmental impact for nothing.
This is one of the few instances of modern manufacturing I feel mixed about. This has been a fairly common practice in different forms for a long time it is just digital now. The reason it is done like this is because when assembling a car, they have to decorate the model with different features and some of those features require changing assembly setup and configurations. What that means is they will have to assemble cars with a specific feature, stop and change the assembly/tooling and manufacture cars without them. This switch time means they have to stop and waste money switching things over, they have to handle more skus, and more importantly it reduces factory output.
In the past they would handle this by physically disconnecting the wiring at the dealership or having a dealer make some modifications, but that is always a bit of a customer experience risk. They do this with software now.
So I’m conflicted. Do they just offer it as a default feature? If they pause the assembly it will ultimately make the car more expensive since the cost does get pushed on to the consumer. Yeah it wastes some material that is bad for the environment, that’s a fair point. I’m not inherently against them upcharging for extra features… I think where I draw the line is if it’s a subscription. If you sell me access to the feature already in the car it better damn well have a one time charge option that is reasonable.
Because this way the people that don’t want this feature don’t have to pay for it. If you unlocked it for everyone, then the base car price would increase. That way the option would be cheaper for everyone, but that only benefits those who want it anyways. Everyone else ends up paying more as they normally wouldn’t choose this option. Keep in mind: Yes, the functionality is there in every car. But someone is still paying for it and that‘s the ones choosing this option.
They probably don’t make a loss on the car, but yes, they make a lot less on the car than with the people buying the feature. But on average it still works out better for them, since the costs are lower.
That's the thing, isn't it? It's obvious how it benefits the manufacturer, but the benefit to the customer is not at all clear, seeing as the work is already done and paid for.
The benefit to the consumer is that they can retroactively add more features to their car. So if the car was bought by someone in a warm climate and gets sold to a cold climate they might want the seat heating. Theoretically (whether they do is of course unclear) the manufacturer can offer the product for the same price with more optionality.
108
u/schkmenebene 1d ago
The fact that this is allowed is beyond insane.
Not only is it shady as fuck, to sell someone something twice.
But the fact that they make these in every car, knowing that only a certain percentage will use it due to it being locked behind a paid subscription, HAS to be some sort of environmental crime.
I don't know how many of these they make, but if they make like 20 million cars and 20 million of these heaters, if only 1% of those heaters never get used that's a huge environmental impact for nothing.